Hi Marc,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> wrote on Thu, 28 Jun 2018 13:45:09
+0100:
> On 22/06/18 16:14, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> > The ICU can handle several type of interrupt, each of them being handled
> > differently on AP side. On CP side, the ICU should be able to make the
> > distinction between each interrupt group by pointing to the right parent.
> >
> > This is done through the introduction of new bindings, presenting the ICU
> > node as the parent of multiple ICU sub-nodes, each of them being an
> > interrupt type with a different interrupt parent. ICU interrupt 'clients'
> > now directly point to the right sub-node, avoiding the need for the extra
> > ICU_GRP_* parameter.
> >
> > ICU subnodes are probed automatically with devm_platform_populate(). If
> > the node as no child, the probe function for NSRs will still be called
> > 'manually' in order to preserve backward compatibility with DT using the
> > old binding.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu.c
> > index 24d45186eb6b..f7c2ede9c222 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu.c
> > @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ struct mvebu_icu {
> > struct regmap *regmap;
> > struct device *dev;
> > atomic_t initialized;
> > + bool legacy_bindings;
> > };
> >
> > struct mvebu_icu_irq_data {
> > @@ -51,6 +52,30 @@ struct mvebu_icu_irq_data {
> > unsigned int type;
> > };
> >
> > +static struct mvebu_icu *mvebu_icu_dev_get_drvdata(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct mvebu_icu *icu;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Device data being populated means we should be using legacy bindings.
> > + * Using the _parent_ device data means we should be using new bindings.
> > + */
> > + icu = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev);
> > + if (icu) {
> > + if (!icu->legacy_bindings)
> > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > + } else {
> > + icu = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
> > + if (!icu)
> > + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> > +
> > + if (icu->legacy_bindings)
> > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > + }
>
> Doesn't this make legacy_bindings completely redundant? Either the
> pointer is !NULL in the device, and this is using a legacy binging, or
> it is stored in the parent, and this is a new binding. You could even
> have a helper for that:
>
> static bool is_legacy(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> return !dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev);
> }
>
> The driver really doesn't need to be defending against itself, if
> anything, and it would save you quite a bit of error handling in the
> callers of this function.
You're right, I will simplify this.
Thanks,
Miquèl
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
